Quote:
Originally Posted by cjseliga
She's a DO (Doctor of Osteopathy), NOT an OD, an OD would be the abbreviation for a Doctor of Optometry!
|
In other words, she's not really a doctor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake
Agreed. She's spreading "misinformation"?
|
Misinformation = Error
You see this with baby name websites.
90% of the meanings of those names are wrong, and if it's a so-called "Native American" name the odds are 99.9% it's wrong.
And how do we know they're wrong? Because they were taken from Western genre novels and films.
Those names don't actually exist in any of the 567 Native American tribal groups in the US. They were made up by White script writers and authors because they sounded "cool."
Some people are naming their baby girl Nahmana, because these websites say it means "beautiful" when actually it means "traitor," "spy" or someone who does something in secret.
The person who put up the first baby name website didn't know what they were doing and made a lot of errors out of ignorance or stupidity with no intent to deceive.
Then, 100 other people ripped the names with a copy-n-paste to their website for click-bait, because it's all about advertising revenue.
You see a lot of misinformation on the internet, especially for legal stuff like when can you record a conversation, or Ponzi-schemes, or statutes of limitations.
Your car was repossessed and there are 100+ websites that will tell you it's a written contract and the statute of limitations is 6-15 years depending on the State.
So wrong. Unless you live in Louisiana, it falls under Article 2 of the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) and the statute of limitations is 4 years.
Same with rental agreements/contracts. The internet says 6-15 years depending on the State because it's a written contract and not an oral, implied or express agreement.
So wrong. It's 4 years under Article 4 of the UCC, unless you live in Louisiana, or the handful of States that have not yet adopted Article 4.
Disinformation = Propaganda. You know the info is wrong, but you spread it anyway and with the intent to deceive.
The "doctor" is spreading disinformation. She knows the info is wrong; knows there's no science or experimental studies to back it up; refuses to undertake any experiments or studies to support her claims; but she spreads it anyway.
It might help if people understood the difference between an experimental study and an observational study.
In an observational study, there's no experimental design and no original research. You're just pulling data from a variety of sources.
So you pull cancer data from a couple of zip codes or census tracts and see certain numbers of childhood leukemia and then note there are high-tension power lines or a base-cell tower nearby.
Correlation is not causation here and no reputable scientist or research would claim that high-tension power lines or base-cell towers cause leukemia.
There are any number of lurking variables here. Did anyone do a soil test?
Quite a few subdivisions in the '70s and '80s were built on legal or illegal chemical dumping sites.
In an experimental study, you control the variables. In one, people were told to report at the onset of cold symptoms. Some were given a placebo, while others were given varying percentages of Zinc (I believe 20% to 50%).
People who took the Zinc supplement reported their colds were of shorter duration than those who did not.
Now, correlation really is causation.
If your r-value was 0.84, that would be a pretty strong positive correlation.
If we look at r-squared, that would be 0.7056. We'll call it 0.71.
So, 71% of the effect can be attributed to the application of Zinc.
The other 29%? That might be age, overall health, diet and/or DNA. If you wanted, you could design another experimental study to take those factors into consideration, but I don't see the point (although some enterprising individual would probably wrangle a government grant to do it.)
Anyway, the esteemed "doctor" ain't go bupkis and needs to put up or shut up.